Summary of the 2008-03-11 Packaging Committee meeting

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 01:25 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>>> "VS" == Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta at iki.fi> writes:
> > 
> > VS> And by the way, in my opinion the discussion should not be only
> > VS> about Unicode, but about restricting package names even to a
> > VS> subset of ASCII (let's say eg.  a-z, A-Z, 0-9, -, +, _, .).
> > 
> > This is why we need a concrete proposal to vote on.  Things would have
> > gone much better if we had one.
> > 
> +1
> 
> One of the problems I have with "ban packages with unicode names" is 
> that it doesn't consider what to do when a package name upstream is 
> non-ASCii.
Transliterate/translate them to ASCII.

>   My -1 vote is really a vote against having the Fedora 
> packager make up a name for an upstream package which I very strongly 
> oppose.
Why would this be a problem? 

May-be this is a problem with "pictographic" charsets (May-be
traditional Chinese), but I am having difficulties to imagine this to be
a problem elsewhere, because most (all?) languages have an nominal
transliteration/translation to ASCII.

>   If a proposal were written that told what the packager needs to 
> do to get an acceptable package name I'd likely abstain or (possibly) agree.
I agree that requesting such a name from upstream is advisable, but
making it mandatory to me qualifies as bureaucracy.

Ralf